Did Ceasefire Foundation get cold feet and wimp out on their proposed Open Carry ban?

Baked on Grease · Dec 15, 2011

amlevin said:
I like the part about how gun violence is lower where there are more restrictive laws. Whoever wrote that has been drinking too much of his bath water.

Apparently hasn't compared Washington DC's gun restrictions with THEIR violence rate. Ditto for Chicago, and I leave California, especially Southern CA, to your own interpretation.

What they are doing is taking very specific areas that have restrictive laws, but low population thus low crime rates when compared to cities and their surrounding suburbs to make this conclusion. You'll see them cite State laws for gun control, but only cite rates for areas outside the big cities. They also ignore crime rates when LESS restrictive laws are passed, because they invariably go down, Florida CC being the main example.

Also, they usually lump accidents and crime together when calling for gun control, but you won't see it till you delve all the way into their studies.

They also forget to seperate legal guns used in crimes versus illegal guns. Do they really think making it harder for LAC's to acquire guns will stop criminals who already overwhelmingly get guns by ignoring laws already? :shakeshead:

Sent using tapatalk

badkarma · Dec 15, 2011

I reject your reality and substitute it for my own!

jt59 · Dec 15, 2011

Baked on Grease said:
Do they really think making it harder for LAC's to acquire guns will stop criminals who already overwhelmingly get guns by ignoring laws already? :shakeshead:

Sent using tapatalk

I think you are presuming that they actually want to reduce gun crime as opposed to reducing gun ownership....

John Hardin · Dec 16, 2011

rbaconator said:
But also say that respectful posts will be left alone.

Good luck, but I wager you will find that anything that disagrees with them or tries to use statistical data to prove their statements are in error is automatically classified as "disrespectful".

Dain Bramage · Dec 16, 2011

rbaconator said:
I really hope not...:shocker:

Hey, it worked so well for the DOJ.

tombrewster421 · Dec 16, 2011

John Hardin said:
Good luck, but I wager you will find that anything that disagrees with them or tries to use statistical data to prove their statements are in error is automatically classified as "disrespectful".

Yes, facts shall not be allowed in an emotionally driven hatred towards inanimate objects.

Mt. Rainier scares me. Can we ban it? And throw in Californians while we're at it.

Jayd1981 · Dec 16, 2011

Posted on Brady Campaigns facebook page to let them know my guns killed no one today. I don't have high expectations of it staying there though.

MadHatter66 · Dec 17, 2011

I asked them where they got that number in their video... 11432 people killed by guns so far this year...or they claim. 2010 was only 8775 and the year prior was 9199 and there is a downward trend according the the FBI the past decade... So I asked them to back up their numbers and they banned me

Dave Workman · Dec 27, 2011

George Washington said:
The organization posts its goals here: http://www.washingtonceasefire.org/advocacy

This is what they currently have posted on the web page:

Washington CeaseFire believes there are several laws that should be passed to reduce gun violence in Washington State. Those states that have the most restrictive gun legislation have just one-sixth the level of gun violence versus those states with the least restrictive laws, according to the book, “Private Gun, Public Health,” by Dr. David Hemenway of the Harvard School of Public Health. Other states have: closed the gun-show loophole; banned the sale of military-style assault weapons; limited handgun sales to one per month; carefully regulated concealed weapon permits, and banned open carrying of guns. None of those policies apply in Washington state, which ranks among the most loosely regulated states in terms of guns. Washington CeaseFire believe those policies should be adopted to save lives in Washington state.

In the event that Ceasefire Foundation goes ahead with their plan to try to bus agitators from Seattle to Olympia to push through their proposal to ban open carry, I still call on all gun owners to "Occupy" Ceasefire Foundation's 2012 Chartered Bus to Olympia
http://www.washingtonceasefire.net/content/view/144/27/

No, George:
They haven't changed their intentions at all since I blew the whistle on them back in November in my column. They've merely done what anti-gunners have been doing since 1994: Changing and refining their rhetoric. It's clear from their wording, which I put in BF, that they still have OC in their sights.

So, keep yor dance card open boys and girls, because you may need to waltz down to Olympia sometime in the next 60 days.

Bill Starks · Dec 29, 2011

slapmonkay said:
Another funny thing.

I tried searching "Gregory Roberts" on images.Google.com and M1Gunr's photo came up.

M1, are you Gregory Roberts, the director of wa ceasefire?

On another note, does anyone actually have his photo?

<------ As you can see, I'm not him....I'm better looking, just ask Deros.

Bill Starks · Dec 29, 2011

rbaconator said:
I'm not banned... shall I work up a nice rebuttal to their website and post it to their FB wall? In their info bit it says they can delete anything they want if they want. But also say that respectful posts will be left alone. So I need to keep that in mind. It will be like those stupid argumentative essays I had to do in high school lol. This forum is filled with links and info and such that research shouldn't be too hard

I was having some great conservations with folks on their FB page when I got banned. Those folks even asked why I got banned. It matters not, if you are pro gun you WILL get banned.

hermannr · Dec 29, 2011

I'm with Dave on this one...No way have the ceasefire crowd backed off. There will be something this session don't think you can sit back on your behind and just let it go. Just look at what they managed to do in the 2009 session.

I think we should start our own push for change...like in 270, actually we should repeal anything left over from Lowery and 1994 (minimum 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270, and 280 all just gone, not ammended, just gone) that isn't already gone, All you have to do is look at some of this stuff and you can see what an anti can do in one session.

Metalhead47 · Dec 30, 2011

hermannr said:
I'm with Dave on this one...No way have the ceasefire crowd backed off. There will be something this session don't think you can sit back on your behind and just let it go. Just look at what they managed to do in the 2009 session.

I think we should start our own push for change...like in 270, actually we should repeal anything left over from Lowery and 1994 (minimum 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270, and 280 all just gone, not ammended, just gone) that isn't already gone, All you have to do is look at some of this stuff and you can see what an anti can do in one session.

...let's not forget that stupid "no loaded long guns in a vehicle" one either!

hermannr · Dec 30, 2011

Metalhead47 said:
...let's not forget that stupid "no loaded long guns in a vehicle" one either!

Yes, that was another Lowery gift to us in 1994.

Bill Starks · Dec 30, 2011

I would like to see this part of 9.41.070 repealed....

(13) A person may apply for a concealed pistol license:

(a) To the municipality or to the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in a municipality;

(b) To the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in an unincorporated area; or

(c) Anywhere in the state if the applicant is a nonresident.

....and replaced with any municipality or county in the state.

sudden valley gunner · Jan 1, 2012

M1Gunr said:
I would like to see this part of 9.41.070 repealed....

(13) A person may apply for a concealed pistol license:

(a) To the municipality or to the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in a municipality;

(b) To the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in an unincorporated area; or

(c) Anywhere in the state if the applicant is a nonresident.

....and replaced with any municipality or county in the state.

That would be better....even better...no permit necessary since our state constitution says our right to be armed shall not be impaired.

Did Ceasefire Foundation get cold feet and wimp out on their proposed Open Carry ban?

Baked on Grease

Regular Member

badkarma

Regular Member

jt59

Regular Member

John Hardin

Regular Member

Dain Bramage

Regular Member

tombrewster421

Regular Member

Jayd1981

Regular Member

MadHatter66

Regular Member

Dave Workman

Regular Member

Bill Starks

State Researcher

Bill Starks

State Researcher

hermannr

Regular Member

Metalhead47

Regular Member

hermannr

Regular Member

Bill Starks

State Researcher

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member